Oh Really wrote on Jul 16, 2008 5:14 PM:
" The liberal view of complete and total seperation of Chuch and State is a very poor argument. Clearly the correct interpretation of the first ammendment is not to have a State sponsored religion.
Our forefathers, who wrote the Constitution, believed in God and practiced religion in the US Government from day 1.
You want proof.
The bible George Washington was sworn in as President of the United States with is currently on tour in America.
It's kind of hard to deny that. "
jeff wrote on Jul 6, 2008 11:10 AM:
" To the writer who complained about Craig Jones active participation in discussion I say "How shall we conduct the business then? As a community we must voice what our preferences are in some public forum or else accept whatsoever others who have been voted into office by others should decide for us. It is my dream that all citizens will someday have an equal voice, til then. Bravo and Kudos to those like Craig who say what is on their mind. If you choose not to participate then accept the consequence of your inaction! "
Re Whats Ironic wrote on Jul 5, 2008 4:49 PM:
" Boy, you are absolutely right on that one but only one small comment, there are small groups such as the one in Neecedah of only a few followers, many false profits. Also many that dorn themselves in many luxuries from the profits reaped off of the common folks who look up to them as if they are "God". People look to them for answers. Wanting something to believe in.
Laz: Gather in his name, but remember that it works both ways, not that either is right. Religion is in your heart, home, wherever but should not be forced by those that chose not to participate. "
Exasperated wrote on Jul 4, 2008 11:16 AM:
" Doesn't Craig Jones have something else to do? "
Whats ironic wrote on Jul 3, 2008 2:08 PM:
" Imagine this:
13 guys walk up to you today. They are white people, although they claim to be from the middle east. One of them says that they are the son of an imaginary man who lives in the sky. They all tell you that if you don't choose to believe what they believe, and conduct yourself accordingly, you're going to spend the rest of eternity, in your afterlife (assuming there is one), in a pit of firey damnation. Then, when you tell them that you believe something different, they go so far as to tell you that you're wrong and they're right, simply because they say so.
If that happened today...those 13 guys would all be locked up in a psych ward somewhere. Lucky for them they said this stuff 2000 years ago, when people were still sitting around fires in the middle of nowhere without the cognitive ability to think for themselves, and were more easily scared by fearmongers.
That's the nice part about religion. They have no proof that what they're saying is true. That's why it's called faith, right? But at the same time, you also can't prove a negative. So, they can't prove it's true...but they don't need to. The rest of us can't empirically prove it's false, so they don't have to believe us either. That's why it's entirely nonsensical to talk religion with people. You'd be better off trying to talk to a wall. "
Lazarus wrote on Jul 3, 2008 8:08 AM:
" To secular observer: Seems to me that conservatives aren't the ones picking the fight, they're just defending traditional values and rights under the Constitution. It is the liberals who are always trying to knock out any mention/sign/observance of God, simply because THEY don't agree with it.
To Oppressed: The Tomah School District didn't have a policy banning religious expression; that was that TEACHER'S own policy she wrote up for her class. So I ask again as I have before, what gives the teacher the right to think she can circumvent the school's policy, AS WELL AS the Constitution.
As far as that Prof. Barnes is concerned, I would be more "upset" to know that our tax dollars are used against our will to fund abortions of all types. "
Oppressed wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:36 PM:
" At least Barnes did not make it national news, and majority ruled it stayed....in the school case, they were forced to change the policy, no law was broken or made in either case. Also Barnes did not EMBELLISH his belief like the student and oppressed christians in the school did. Oviously two different scenerio's but it doesn't make AP right. "
Cry baby wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:30 PM:
" The difference is AGE....yes, both were being cry babies but a student being disrespectful is quite different than an adult. "
To Oppressed wrote on Jun 30, 2008 2:05 PM:
" It seems like you are applying a double standard: When Barnes complained about a policy he thought was wrong, anyone who criticized him was a crybaby. Yet, you are criticizing the the student for complaining about a policy he disagreed with. Does that make you a crybaby? Both stood up for something they believe in. As a matter of law, Barnes was incorrect and the student was correct. "
Oppressed wrote on Jun 29, 2008 6:13 AM:
" They feel they are oppressed and want to save the world by their bantering. They are worried about other schools but yet they wanted the policy in Tomah removed. It's okay for them to complain about everything but do nothing except proclaim their faith. You people are turning folks off. You encourage young kids to be disrespectful, but that's okay because it was only in the name of Jesus, what a laugh, as if that makes it better than any other fit a child would have. "
For Prof Eric Barnes edification and enjoyment wrote on Jun 29, 2008 12:00 AM:
" Main article: Establishment Clause of the First Amendment
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by state governments. For example, in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion".
Wikipedia
***********
If Prof doesn't like to live with the traditions of the city, then he should move elsewhere and leave the people in peace who DO enjoy them. "
Mike wrote on Jun 28, 2008 2:11 PM:
" Can't you people disagree without being rude. There is no room for name calling in civil discussion. And you call yourselves christians.
Mike "
secular observor wrote on Jun 27, 2008 4:07 PM:
" Why is it that the conservatives always want to pick a fight? "
Advertisement 
Advertisement 
